Vinyl Rip vs Orignial CD

[Jud]

Jim LeSurf studied physics:

https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/iandm/part12/page2.html

In summary, at best comparable, real world significantly worse (equivalent bit depth).

 

The limitations of physics are not a problem for either LPs or CDs in reproducing most music, unless you spend a lot of time with the 1812 Overture versions that use real cannons. So we are not talking about the physical capabilities of those media or of higher resolution digital files.

 

What creates the limitations we experience in practicality is recording quality. And this, due to market forces, is almost exactly the reverse of what it should be.

 

Digital file loudness is based on the largest market segment, folks listening with earbuds with very little isolation. Wide dynamic range would lose half the music in those circumstances. So those are often the loudest, most compressed versions of a musical piece.

 

Then there are CDs. New CDs follow along with digital files, loud and compressed. Older ones that came before digital downloads will usually have higher dynamic range, having been made for people doing dedicated listening at home.

 

LPs, the media least physically capable of wide dynamic range, are paradoxically usually recorded with the widest dynamic range of the media available these days, because they are being made expressly for a market made up of dedicated home listeners.

[Jud]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]24779[/ATTACH]

 

OK, I even tried Google image search, and I give up - tell me where that comes from.

[Jud]

Strange. The image appears as the second top hit when I google for vinyl 1812 overture.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]24789[/ATTACH]

 

I tried searching on the uploaded image itself, and got a bunch of moiré.

[Jud]

Appreciate the link as it proves my point. Jim's main argument is about dynamic range,that CD's and LP's have similar theoretical limitations for dynamic range; even with the bizarre sounding Telarc digital LP's I purchased in the early 80's this promise of digital vs analog tape mastering was obvious for dynamic range.

 

The other factor is sampling rate, Jim does postulate for the effective mechanical sampling rate of vinyl which is what matters for resolution of

complex signals

 

"The effect is to divide the microns swing of a 0 dB 1 kHz sinewave into 32,000 steps — just as if the signal had passed through an ADC! "

Consider a CD would capture 44.1 samples for one 1khz sine wave vs the 32,000 of the LP mechanical playback limitation. So in Jim's model vinyl equates to a 32mhz/16bit digital playback solution.

 

32KHz. You're off by 3 orders of magnitude.

 

Also, in any case we're talking about dynamic range (the "bits" side of the resolution spec) rather than sample rate (the "Hz" side).

 

Edit: Ah, I see how you got there - you're thinking it's 32,000 steps for *each* wave of the 1,000. I'm not at all sure that's how it was meant. But anyway: as noted, we're talking about dynamic range rather than resolution.

[Jud]

What I said was correct... the effective sample rate limitation calculated based on typical stylus contact area of an elliptical stylus and molecular size characteristics of a theoretical diamond LP was 32,000 steps/samples for a sine wave vs 44.1 steps/samples for CD sampling rate when sampling a 1khz signal. The practical value is likely to be a factor 10X lower because we use vinyl, not diamond but that's still 10(3) times greater than CD

 

If I confused by using the term bit depth earlier , I apologize... again no disagreement that LP and CD can provide same dynamic range. What matters is the product of bit depth and sampling rate... here vinyl has a big advantage over CD limitations

 

No. You're ignoring the Sampling Theorem. Even ignoring the calculation regarding vinyl, we can say the sample rate of analog is effectively infinite. That's going to be higher than any digital format sampling rate we look at, right? But with digital audio, you're not listening to samples, you're listening to analog converted from the samples. So you're back at an infinite sample rate again, no different than vinyl.

 

As has been discussed many times in this forum, sample rate isn't the practical limitation in tracking the input analog signal, not even at CD resolution. It's actually trivial to get a perfectly overlaid response curve digital<->analog on a scope. The practical limitations come from distortions that A/D and D/A processes introduce.

[Jud]

By entry TT I meant indeed Rega RP1 with Performance Pack - it won't be my primary source, but I found that some releases are better on vinyl or only on vinyl from Blue Note or Columbia. I have Marantz PM6004 with integrated phono MM stage - think at start may be fine.

 

There are good sounding digital versions or high resolution transfers, but every time you need to do research a priori to check if worth money.

 

Being able to listen to my best-liked (and sometimes the only available) versions of the music I love was the primary motivator not only for me to keep my turntable and LPs, but also for getting a DAC that can accept DSD input. I think what you're planning is a great idea.

 

The vinyl resurgence has had an beneficial side effect for me even though I am not buying new LPs. Local stores that sell new and used vinyl frequently sell used CDs, which are available cheap (seen as less desirable than LPs by the stores' clientele) and are frequently from the era before the "loudness wars" hit. I've picked up some great old CDs, or even CD box sets, for between $1 and $3 apiece.